Would you support national CCTV, facial recognition and DNA collection at birth?

[Rostio]

For the purpose of law and order, would you be for or against:
A) More CCTV and facial recognition, all connected to a national system.
B) DNA collected and recorded from babies at birth.

(Ironically, the first time I've used the AI title generation!).

no

No

That’s horribly distopian to collect babies dna for law and order.

No

No. We have a right to a private life. It would lead to future generations biographing our whole lives in the name of history. They probably already will but I don't want videos of me as well

No.

No - collecting DNA in particular seems a bit extreme.

What level of data like this (fingerprints etc) do we collect on people coming into the country? I’m not sure.

It would be helpful if people could explain why they're against it.

That’s horribly distopian to collect babies dna for law and order.
That would have been the argument against collecting names, parentage and date of birth at some point.

No

No. We have a right to a private life. It would lead to future generations biographing our whole lives in the name of history. They probably already will but I don't want videos of me as well

This is a really good response. Made me think about the family genealogy I've done - tracking my ancestors through census returns, occupation journals and military records. Hadn't thought about it as an invasion of their privacy before.
Videos - I think more people are currently recording and posting videos of themselves than any CCTV company is.

Literally no need for that. We can’t even manage to have national ID cards, how exactly would a universal DNA library work?

Definitely no

Not a fan of this idea. Bit too George Orwell for me!

No

That’s horribly distopian to collect babies dna for law and order.

What about people who endure and survive horrible crimes and have to wait years for justice until their assailant is caught by DNA (or die without justice brought at all).

Facial recognition is very inaccurate

No. Due to privacy issues and how the data could be misused.
Your point re people uploading videos - it's their own choice to do that. Big difference.

Literally no need for that. We can’t even manage to have national ID cards, how exactly would a universal DNA library work?

Well, I am pro ID cards. There is already a national DNA database. I remember once at Leeds station they were paying people £10 to contribute their DNA.

Every time people provide a reason, there is a counter argument of false equivalence i.e. you already carry a phone, everyone knows your location, you already have ID, everyone already knows your name, you live in a house, everyone already knows bleah bleah bleah.

State surveillance is creepy and wrong. Whatever exists is too much and adding more is sickening. Any excuse for it is just an excuse.

That's it.

Have you seen what's happened to the Biobank data?

Routine surveillance is used by fascist regimes to establish, maintain, and normalise control over society. Surveillance enables fascist power by suppressing dissent, enforcing conformity, and cultivating fear.

Your point re people uploading videos - it's their own choice to do that. Big difference. Not to the point of our ancestors making biographies of us without our permission I don't think.

Yes this

Yes it's true most people do post videos and pictures of themselves online but a minority of us don't and the choice for privacy should be there. Only three pictures of me exist, and they're physical photos

Routine surveillance is used by fascist regimes to establish, maintain, and normalise control over society. Surveillance enables fascist power by suppressing dissent, enforcing conformity, and cultivating fear.

That sounds like it was taken from AI.

But I agree, the strongest argument for me is that whilst I might be comfortable with the current government having this data on me, who is to say what future governments would find lawful or unlawful.